Though Mitt Romney does not support abortion unless in cases of incest and/or rape, his son, Tagg, obviously does not share the same view…

TMZ is reporting:

Mitt Romney’s son Tagg — who had twins this year through a surrogate — signed an agreement that gave the surrogate, as well as Tagg and his wife, the right to abort the fetuses in non-life threatening situations … and Mitt Romney covered some of the expenses connected with the arrangement … and it may boil down to an incredibly stupid mistake.

The twin boys –– David Mitt and William Ryder — were born on May 4, 2012. We’ve learned Tagg and his wife Jen, along with the surrogate and her husband, signed a Gestational Carrier Agreement dated July 28, 2011. Paragraph 13 of the agreement reads as follows:

“If in the opinion of the treating physician or her independent obstetrician there is potential physical harm to the surrogate, the decision to abort or not abort is to be made by the surrogate.”

Translation: Tagg and Jen gave the surrogate the right to abort the fetuses even if her life wasn’t in danger. All the surrogate has to show is “potential physical harm,” which could be something like preeclampsia — a type of high blood pressure that could damage the mother’s liver, kidney or brain, but is not necessarily life-threatening.

Paragraph 13 goes on:

“In the event the child is determined to be physiologically, genetically or chromosomally abnormal, the decision to abort or not to abort is to be made by the intended parents. In such a case the surrogate agrees to abort, or not to abort, in accordance with the intended parents’ decision.”

And there’s another relevant provision in Paragraph 13:

“Any decision to abort because of potential harm to the child, or to reduce the number of fetuses, is to be made by the intended parents.”Translation: Tagg and his wife, Jen, had the right to abort the fetuses if they felt they would not be healthy.

Sources connected with Mitt Romney tell TMZ, Mitt was involved in the surrogate arrangement because he paid some of the expenses connected with the agreement. We do not know if Mitt Romney read the contract or knew the terms.

Mitt has said, “I’m in favor of abortion being legal in the case of rape and incest and the health and life of the mother.” Otherwise, Romney is against abortion.

Now for the stupid mistake. We’ve learned Tagg chose the same surrogate in 2009, who gave birth to a boy. Attorney Bill Handel — a nationally-known expert in surrogacy law who put the deal together between Tagg and the surrogate — tells TMZ when the 2009 contract was drafted there was no Paragraph 13 providing for abortion because Tagg and his wife didn’t want it.

Handel says in 2011, when the second contract was being drafted, everyone involved “just forgot” to remove Paragraph 13. Handel says, “No one noticed. What can I say?”

In a recent hidden video, Romney is caught speaking in a negative manner about the validity of Obama supporters saying that those who back President Obama—are “victims” who are “dependent upon government” and “pay no income tax.” He noted: “My job is not to worry about those people. I’ll never convince them they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives.”

He even went on to say such things about the “Palestinian problem,” Romney said peace in the Middle East is not possible and a Palestinian state is not feasible, telling donors that Palestinians have “no interest whatsoever in establishing peace and that the pathway to peace is almost unthinkable to accomplish.”

Romney’s remarks, denigrating nearly half of the electorate, sent the Romney campaign iinto panic mode. The campaign hastily convened a late-night press conference to address his controversial statements, and Romney stood by his “off the cuff” comments, while conceding that they were “not elegantly stated.” He claimed his comments where merely a “snippet” and not the “full response.” That was not true; his comments were shown in full. He added, “I hope the person who has the video would put out the full material.”

Come in for a slice, leave with a bear hug — along with a heated political debate playing out in the comments of Yelp.

The Wild West nature of the internet kicked up for a Republican business owner who showed support for President Obama — in the form of a bear hug.

Scott Van Nuzer, owner of Big Apple Pizza in Fort Pierce, Fla., sped away from the golf course when he heard the president was at his pizza shop. Van Nuzer, who crossed party lines in 2008 to vote for Obama, wanted to show his support with a Secret Service-approved bear hug.

Shortly thereafter, the pizza shop’s Yelp ratings took a beating, with comments coming from thousands of miles away.

And shortly after the dip, the ratings started to improve, with counter-posters taking on the negative reviewers. At press time, the number of five-star ratings vastly outweigh the negative ratings, with Yelp possibly having the foul-mouthed and vitriolic ones removed as content violations to its terms of service.

It’s red-state vs blue-state in a very important swing state in a very 21st-century way.It’s also a free speech issue, in a way, as just because comments may be untoward, but not profane, it’s a wonder if they are removed. Basically, what’s hate speech and what’s a contrary opinion?

It’s also reminiscent of the Joe the Plumber phenomenon from 2008, if Van Nuzzer gets much more attention.

An early negative post from Colorado:

To all of you libtards criticizing the conservatives for posting negative reviews for essentially the same reason you’re posting positive reviews is kind of silly isn’t it? You’re equally guilty of doing the exact same thing!

And a recent rebutal from California:

I just drove 40 straight hours, 2563 miles to try their pizza on my lunch break. Holy Gadzookas Batman, it was worth the drive. This is without a doubt the best pizza in all of Florida. Now to drive back to California. Boooo…

This will not soon go away.

I can’t for November though. I’m voting for the best candidate. Not the popular candidate.